After months of having a hard time to locate Andre Vega, Court papers were finally served on him a few weeks ago in relation to the scandalous payment from the Government’s Treasury of $400,000 as compensation to him for land in Belize City which he bought for $15,000. Vega bought the land from his relative Hilmer Alamilla, who had purchased it from the Government for a pittance. The land was eventually discovered to be privately-owned and that turned the whole deal belly up, with Government being forced to pay Vega.


In the eyes of the public, the fiasco is another reason why former Deputy Prime Minister Gaspar Vega led a scandal-ridden Ministry of Natural Resources. Today, the slow wheels of justice turned a bit when the matter came up before the Supreme Court. Justice Courtney Abel heard preliminary submissions from both sides, and in a surprising move Vega’s attorney asked the judge to consider removing Hilmer Alamilla as a respondent in the matter. It’s a strategic move by the defense because Alamilla is the one who purchased the land from the Government, even though Vega still ended up collecting the compensation. Outside the Court, Vega’s attorney Estevan Perrera explained why he made the request, which was granted by the court.


Screen_Shot_2017-05-08_at_8.03.29_PMEstevan Perrera – Attorney at Law


“We had filed an application for the second defendant to be struck out as a defendant in the matter and it was successful and it was ordered that the second defendant be removed from the claim.”


Reporter


“Would you venture to share your opinion on his absence in the case and its effect against your client, the other client Mr. Andrea Vega?”


Estevan Perrera – Attorney at Law


“Well, we won’t be able to say at this point in time we just completed this portion of the hearing and now after seeing the results of what transpired this morning we would then look at Mr. Vegas case once more and the well decide what we’ll do next with that matter.”


Reporter


“Has to be that how strong the government case is with the absence of Mr Alamilla, right?”


Estevan Perrera – Attorney at Law


“Yes, indeed we’ll definitely be looking at that next.”


Perrera also explained why he believes Vega has no case to answer.


Estevan Perrera – Attorney at Law


“Our position in terms of the defence is simply that there was a compensation in response to this matter and we need to see how that will go with respect to the court ones this is brought to the actual trial.”


Reporter


“Are you been able to say what is exactly your clients’ complaint the lawsuit while he feels he is not liable to have to return this money?”


Estevan Perrera – Attorney at Law


“The claim itself that is been brought against Mr. Vega is in respect to a suggestion that there is a purported sale agreement that was signed however our position is simple that it was a compensation agreement that was signed and that it should be maintained as a compensation agreement and that exactly what was done.”


Reporter


“Does your client view this as a witch-hunt against him for his father’s name?”


Screen_Shot_2017-05-08_at_8.02.01_PMEstevan Perrera – Attorney at Law


“You would have to speak to him in respect to that.”


As similar controversial compensation deal was paid to known UDP supporter attorney Sharon Pitts. Pitts has also been taken to court and her matter is being reviewed separately.


Both Pitts and Vega were given ample time to return the monies paid. Both refused.

Share this post